Also, you can do <num>@q (e.g. 4@q) anyways, and @@ to repeat a macro, so that isn't that useful of a remapping anyways.
People, especially vi users (compared to Emacs users, who in my experience have few qualms about heavily customizing their editor), like to say that, but in my many years of experience I just can't say this is true in practice. I don't use coworkers' accounts so alien configurations never trip me up, and when I find myself working on a prod host that doesn't have my configuration, I just don't find myself tripping up in practice (if I had to guess, perhaps the absence of my custom color scheme in those cases may be flipping a 'go back to compat mode' switch in my head).
I do not use any other programs that have "vim emulation". Tried that firefox 'total conversion mod' a while ago and hated it.
Executing macros the regular way is what I do for all macros I want to be long-lived (@q can get overwritten a dozen of times or more an hour for me, so complex operations I want to keep around longer I store in other registers), but even @@ does not have the low mental barrier to entry and satisfying nature that "twock" on a nice loud keyboard has.
(instead of [esc] for escape, I use [capslock] on windows and linux while on thinkpads, and [find](actually super) on linux on my chromebook. xmodmap/autohotkeys/xcape has my bases covered there.)
edit: but . doesn't work for macros, as was pointed out.
<esc>qqq //clear q macro qq //start recording q macro /foo // search for something 3clbar // do some edit @q // call q macro q //done recording @q //invoke q macro
No need to guess how many times to call your macro.
(key-chord-define evil-insert-state-map "jj" 'evil-normal-state)
vrapper (for eclipse) is on par with emacs evil, actually.